Stupid Traffic Question
 

Help me, great Cellar. I seek your collective wisdom.

I drive through this intersection on an almost daily basis and its starting to piss me off thanks to other drivers getting very confused.

http://fox.org/~vince/out/rightturn.jpg

Imagine you're the silver car in the above image approaching the intersection, traveling south (down), in the right lane. The traffic light at this intersection is red and you wish to go around the curve and head west. Is it legal to turn on red?

There is no "No Right On Red" sign.
...but the road doesn't change names when you make the turn. So it may not really be a turn?

Bonus: can a car traveling south in the center lane also turn right on red?

It's not a corner for the cars coming from the top of the picture, it's simply a curve. So if they continue through the light after stopping, they are going "straight" not "turning." They would be running the red light.

Edit: Oh, and my reasoning is that there is no actual sharp corner, so it's not a corner, even though the two roads are 90 degrees to each other. The fact that they have the same name also supports this interpretation.

If there is no other "right" that a person could turn red on, then the sign must refer to the bend. There is a stop line, so it's not "simply a curve".

I say no, they cannot go west on a red.

continuation of road name is meaningless at a crossroads, both roads continue on the other side -doesn't mean the traffic doesn't have to stop.

There is no sign, though.

The traffic light facing southbound traffic makes it even more confusing: the red light is a standard light, but when it turns green it shows an arrow for both lanes.

Did you really mean southbound? The silver car will see what you just described?

Both lanes should be able to turn on red. There appears to be no sight line obstruction for the westbound traffic and no sign saying: no rt. on red.

What is that dark object at the outer apex of the turn?

oh sorry, I misread. Then yes, both lanes. but they have to stop first. and give way to other traffic. and it's not compulsory to go.

Yeah. I'll try to get a photograph of it, tonight.

The number of people who continue on red is about 50%. This results in a lot of angry, impatient drivers.

Looks like a vehicle that was in the southbound turn lane heading east.

Which drivers are getting angry? Ones behind the 50% who won't go on red? Or ones trying to turn left from the other road but prevented by those continuing on red?

The real question is if it's a curve or a corner. If it's a corner, then both lanes can make the turn on red after stopping. If it's a curve, then neither lane can make the "turn" because there is no "turn" to make. They are continuing straight on the same road, which happens to curve.

I think it's a curve because there are no turn arrows painted on the pavement in those two lanes. A lack of arrows means those lanes are lanes that go straight through the intersection. The road has the same name on both sides of the intersection, so it's the same road, and you are not "turning" from one road to another you are simply continuing through the intersection on the same road. There is also no sharp corner.

If the light changes from red to two green arrows pointing right, then that is confusing, because right pointing arrows indicate a turn, not a curve.

Here's the Google Maps link if anyone cares.

hmmm, I see where you're coming from re curve, but I would say that it's a turn. the arrow lights suppot this, and the continuation of road name is irrelevant. (e.g. Sometimes you get roads that "dog leg" when they cross another road, so you have to treat them as two separate road junctions, even though the roads you are leaving at one and joining at another have the same name) Also the lines -we get lines painted on intersections to guide left-turning traffic. Line's don't always imply the continuation of the road, although i do agree it looks like that here

OK I give up. Now I think glatt's right, it's not a turn. I don't know.

Do the cops pull people over who go right on red? if not, then I'd say it's intended to be considered a turn. How's that? If you won't get into trouble, then it's OK..... :lol:

Or.... did you get into trouble and you're thinking of contesting it? :eyebrow:

Heh. I'm not in trouble, but campus police can be a pain with their traffic stops. I don't really want to cross them.

It is better to be safe, but at this long light people tend to get angry and lay on the horn if you stop. I'd say the ticket isn't worth it, though...

Now that I look at it more closely, I'm even more certain that it's a "curve" and not a "corner." There are dotted lines marking the lanes as you go around the curve. They aren't those special tiny dotted lines you sometimes see in intersections to held guide traffic making turns. These are regular dotted lines separating the lanes of the main road.

If you continue around the curve on this main road after stopping for the red light, you better hope there isn't a cop around..

I don't see what the confusion is. The way I read it there's a traffic light where I drew in red. If a sign on that pole says no right turn on red, then the local authorities consider it a turn and don't want you to go through on red.
.
.

There is no sign.

Aside from all the other debate... in Texas at least, the middle lane definitely may not turn right on red, ever. Only the far right lane may turn right on red when the situation allows for it.

But we also get to turn left on red, if it's from a one-way street to another one-way street.

Is there a traffic light for the people coming into the intersection from the right side of the picture?

Ah. Misread that.

I'd make the normal right turn on red, then.

Yeah, we do too. And left from a two-way onto a one way. Yes, I got out my "What Every Driver Must Know" produced by the state of Michigan. It says nothing about having to be in the rightmost lane to make a right on red, though. I've never come across it, I suspect because almost any turn with more than one lane has no right on red signs.

Yeah, the entire intersection is controlled.

I didn't know this and, it seems, Florida has the same law! I guess I've run the red light at this intersection dozens of times. Oops.

http://fox.org/~vince/out/merge.jpg

Looking at that reminds me where people here go right on red from the second lane -coming off the freeway at our nearest exit. right turn only, two lanes, both go on red. Never seen a cop bat an eyelid, but I'm always in the RHL because I have an immediate right turn to make.

psst.

Kitsune, call the police.

So what does the light pattern look like? If the part going up and the part going to the left get green lights at the same time, then it's being treated as "straight".

I thought about that, but what if it is illegal to go right on a red, but no-one's ever drawn their attention to it before.... that intersection'll be swarming with them for months!

Here's what the drive south looks like as you approach the intersection. Indeed, after the normal 'red' goes away, green arrows appear, indicating a turn.

http://fox.org/~vince/out/turn.jpg

But...what the hell?

http://fox.org/~vince/out/turn2.jpg

I guess that's a "80% right turn" arrow.

I'll ask the police tomorrow. I'm going to feel really bad if they set up traps the next day.

That 80% right turn arrow is the traffic engineer shrugging his shoulders and saying "damn if I know."

I think you're right to be confused. Is there much potential for accidents if the signals are not interpreted correctly?

I think I'd write a letter to the local authorities having jurisdiction over your roadway (e.g., City Council or City Traffic Engineer) pointing out they need better signage.

It's hard to say, but I don't think you should turn right on a red in this instance. Especially since you know that there's a green arrow indicating when it's okay to turn.

And unless it's clearly and specifically marked, no, I don't think you can turn from a center lane.

ETA: Here's the Florida Driver Handbook which may provide some guidance. I've found it useful recently to review my state's driver handbook, and I think most of them are online.

Here's another stupid traffic question for you (hope you don't mind, Kitsune): I was told that when driving in a school zone (during designated school hours), you cannot pass another vehicle even in a multi-lane road. Meaning if the school zone says 35 mph, and the person in the lane next to you is going 20 mph, you can only go 20 mph too, in order to avoid passing.

I can't find anthing in the Texas Drivers' Handbook which says this--anyone know the answer?

There's a very similar intersection in our small town, only it has five roads converging instead of three. There are the same angled green arrows for the lane that curves to the right, a normal green light for a center lane that goes straight, and a red for both lanes with no "No Turn on Red" sign. No one ever goes through on the angle on red. That lane is treated as a 'straight through' lane.

On the straight road I travel on, there is an intersection with a road on the left. At the lights, the name of the straight road changes from Platt to Huron, but the road off to the left is also Platt. Platt clearly used to be a straight road with Huron meeting it at a T, but they redeveloped the intersection to change priority.

Does this mean that when driving along Platt, if I stay straight and go onto Huron, I can go on red because it's technically a turn, even though there's no turning involved? I've always thought it would be sensible to be able to do this, but no-one ever does.

I believe it to be a curve upon visual inspection, including the semi-turn green arrows. However, if the road that dead ends at this intersection, causing the need for the traffic light in the first place, also has a traffic light, then the argument can be made that although the road it intersects is a curve, it should be treated as a turn for the benefit of properly providing the right-of-way to the dead-end road traffic that will be traveling onto the fucked-curve/turn road.

That, as far as I know, is the general rule. Although I think I'm one of the few people who actually obey that law.

The only way to clear it up is contact your local department of transportation for the jurisdiction in which this intersection exists, and ask them to clarify by posting directive signs.